Shah Binit Chandravadan, HUF vs. ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shah Binit Chandravadan, HUF, filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 03.11.2017 declaring total income of Rs.18,85,920/-. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 148 of the Act on 30.03.2021, to which the assessee responded by filing a return on 27.04.2021. The assessment was completed under sections 147 and 144B of the Act at a total income of Rs.3,29,68,810/-. The AO made additions of Rs.3,04,73,424/- in respect of Long Term Capital Gain and Rs.6,09,468/- in respect of unexplained expenditure. The assessee filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority, which was dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by confirming the AO's action of denying the Long Term Capital Gain claim and making additions under section 68 of the Act.
• 2. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by confirming the AO's action of adding unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Act.
• 3. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by not adjudicating the ground challenging the AO's assessment under section 147 rws 144B instead of section 153C of the Act.
• 4. The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by confirming the AO's order without independently analyzing the detailed submissions and evidences submitted by the assessee.
• 5. The CIT(A) grievously erred in law and on facts by dismissing the appeal on 18.04.2024 without giving the assessee an opportunity to furnish submissions on or before 19.04.2024, which is against the principle of natural justice.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• ITA No.297/RJT/2023

  Rajkot bench

• Manmohan Gaind vs DCIT

  Delhi bench

• ITA No.1044/Ahd/2024

  Ahmedabad bench

• Praveen Tyagi vs. ITO, Ward 2 (1)

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2015-16Partly Allowed

• Shashi Kant Chaurasia Vs. DCIT

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2018-19 & 2019-20Partly Allowed

• M/s. Amrut Dredging & Shipping Ltd. vs. ITO

  Rajkot bench